VulnerabilityPublished 15 Jan 2025Updated 20 Nov 2025

CVE-2024-11029: Exposure of Sensitive System Information to an Unauthorized Control Sphere

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.5 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.5Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 13% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: None
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 15 Jan 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2024-11029, organizations should first ensure that access to journalctl logs is strictly controlled and limited to trusted administrators only. Implement role-based access controls (RBAC) and audit log access regularly to detect unauthorized viewing. Where possible, configure journalctl to restrict sensitive information exposure by filtering or redacting command-line arguments containing credentials. Consider disabling or modifying FreeIPA audit logging during installation to avoid logging sensitive command lines, or use environment variables or secure input methods that do not expose passwords in command lines. Applying any available patches or updates from FreeIPA or Red Hat as soon as they are released is critical. Additionally, organizations should review their centralized logging infrastructure to ensure that logs containing sensitive data are encrypted in transit and at rest, and that access is logged and monitored. Employing multi-factor authentication and strong password policies for FreeIPA administrators can reduce the risk if credentials are exposed. Finally, conduct regular security assessments and penetration tests to identify and remediate similar information leakage issues.

Description

A flaw was found in the FreeIPA API audit, where it sends the whole FreeIPA command line to journalctl. As a consequence, during the FreeIPA installation process, it inadvertently leaks the administrative user credentials, including the administrator password, to the journal database. In the worst-case scenario, where the journal log is centralized, users with access to it can have improper access to the FreeIPA administrator credentials.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-11029 is the exposure of FreeIPA administrative credentials, which can lead to unauthorized access to the FreeIPA server and its managed identity services. This compromises the confidentiality of sensitive credentials, potentially allowing attackers to escalate privileges, manipulate identity data, or disrupt authentication services. Organizations relying on FreeIPA for centralized identity and authentication management face risks of lateral movement and privilege escalation if attackers gain access to these credentials. The vulnerability is particularly impactful in environments where journal logs are centralized or accessible by multiple users, increasing the attack surface. Although the vulnerability does not directly affect system integrity or availability, the compromise of administrative credentials can indirectly lead to significant operational disruptions and data breaches. The medium severity rating reflects the balance between the high confidentiality impact and the requirement for local privileged access to exploit the vulnerability.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…